Thanks guys, all really helpful and positive stuff. I do need to stop over thinking it, relax a bit, and just try to enjoy it at my own pace!

🙁 hope it all goes as well as possible.

If you don’t mind me asking, what were the circumstances? Fall from height on doing a jump?

I broke my big toe a couple of years ago (abseiling on a stag do, wearing daps). It took a long time to heal. Even now, there is (slight) tenderness when bending it and swelling.

I think this is down to a) constantly load bearing on the foot, assuming you have a cast for say a week, and then a orthopaedic shoe thereafter. b) it being so far from the heart, meaning that nutrients to heal the bone have that much further to travel.

Can’t remember exact timescales, but I think I was surfing 2-3 months after it happened, and mountain biking 2-3 months too. Commuting on my road bike happened while it was still healing though!

I’m in Bristol with a medium Aeris. You’re welcome to have a spin. But as others have said, definitely worth a trip to Bird to try both sizes. I’m glad I did. Spent ages agonising between medium and large (I’m 5’10”), but so glad I went Medium in the end.

Cheers for all the replies.

In answer to queries – yes I have broken bones before. Upper arm, humerus, when I was 18, skateboarding on the tiniest ramp imaginable – first time I tried it, and I was very nervous going in. That was fairly hideous. And broke big toe abseiling down a cliff in Wales on a mate’s stag do 2 years ago (wearing daps!). Again, first time I tried it and was nervous before starting. Still a bit painful and swollen even now!

As an aside, I’ve fallen off my commuting road bike twice over the past year or so, coming crashing down on my side, shoulder/knee etc. Both times was probably only 10-15mph and where the front wheel washed out. Thankfully no objects to collide with, but encouraging only superficial damage was done. So yes, I suppose the body isn’t made of glass.

Yes, I am generally a bit of a worrier and naturally a bit anxious, which doesn’t help. Encouragingly though, I think you’re right in that more time doing something, tends to reduce anxiety. When I first started driving I remember being a nervous wreck, especially for inner city driving, now I don’t even think about it. As it stands, I only tend to go biking once every 2-3 weeks. And when I do, it’s with other riders who are a fair bit quicker at descents than me. So in my head, I’m trying to keep up and beating myself up mentally when I don’t, rather than enjoying the moment.

Maybe the key here really is to just go more. So perhaps a lunch time training ride at Ashton Court in Bristol (a 10 min ride from where I work), once a week. Super tame blue trail, but still time on the bike. And then try to get to Wales or FOD once every week or two. And if I still feel uptight and constantly fearing the worst come 6 months’ time, then perhaps that’s a sign to give up. Hopefully not though!

Thanks guys.

Ironically, I commute on the roads daily through Bristol city centre. I’m careful, and while I appreciate that road crashes (in terms of severity) are generally worse than MTB crashes, the incidence is generally a lot lower. Likewise, I longboard skated throughout my 20’s on the pavements/roads and had countless occasions of falling on my side, only causing grazes.

So perhaps it’s my perception of MTB’s danger that is a bit skewed. But somehow, I just feel that much more vulnerable and on edge while MTBing.

Looking at it from a real-world point of view, I’ve probably used my Bird Aeris 20 times since last Sept (10 at Ashton Court in Bristol – tame blue trail, then a few times at Cymcarn, FOD, once at BPW) and never had an off. Even on the Whyte before that, I had 2 proper – albeit slow speed – offs in a year, involving the front wheel washing out. One where I fell on my face and cut my face a bit, and the other where I got catapulted sideways/forwards over the bars on a left hand switchback on ‘powderhouse’ section of Caffall at Cymcarn. While I crashed down on my left side/shoulder/head, no lasting damage was done. Out of all of my mates, only one has broken anything.

It’s a good point you make though about staying alert, within comfort zone (perhaps pushing it slightly) and backing off when required. That combined with wearing appropriate protection, should mitigate things a fair bit.

There are so many positives of the sport, it would be a shame to turn my back on it.

5’10” on a medium with 40mm stem here. What’s surprising, is that the longer I’ve owned it, the more glad I am that I went medium, and the more relieved I am that I didn’t go large.

It’s not exactly a tight-turning bike anyway, even in a medium (it is noticeably longer and slower turning that my mate’s cube stereo in Large). The figures for the medium Aeris still equate to masses of straight line stability and roomy reach. I just can’t foresee a situation (in my riding) where I’d crave more stability or room. What I do know though, is that if I had a Large I would crave more manoeuvrability in turns. Even on the medium I do sometimes!

There’s not much in it, but the Medium frame is also going to be slightly stiffer and lighter, with a shorter seat tube for fitting in a 150mm dropper.

But it’s a personal thing. Either bike would fit you.

Cheers Alex! Sharing photos via flicker doesn’t seem to work for me.

Hehe indeed, cars are secondary in priority. 😉

Puts my car to shame!

Glad you’re loving it. Faulty rear shock aside, mine has been brilliant. In a straight line, it’s super stable, begs to go faster and is surprisingly playful/poppy. Pedals and climbs reasonably well, although it’s noticeably slower and harder work in this respect, compared to my old Whyte T130.

The angles are great and the spec is brilliant for the money. I also love the low standover and low seat tube.

I went for a medium at 5’10” of average proportions. Torn for a long time on medium or large, after a test ride but having spent more time with my medium, I am certain it’s the right choice. It’s such a long, stable, roomy bike anyway, that the last thing I want is yet more length. While it’s a playful bike in terms of suspension, it’s not a particularly agile bike in terms of turning, and takes the long way round compared to shorter bikes. Even on a medium with a 40mm stem, I consciously have to get my weight forward far more than my old bikes, which feels good, but a Large would involve that much more forward weighting. Out of interest, I decided to hop on my mate’s Lapierre Zesty (2013) and my other mate’s Cube Stereo (2012) – both Medium. They felt TINY compared to my Medium Aeris. Cramped, nervous, short, albeit more agile. My other mate’s Large Orange Alpine (2014) felt comparable in size though.

If I was 5’11.5” upwards, I’d have probably gone for a Large, like the op has though. Although even then, the medium wouldn’t be small. But I am just pleased that the Medium is sized how it is. For my dimensions, the seat tube is just right (allowing for a 150mm reverb), giving loads of standover, but that is combined with a long 620mm top tube/448mm reach and good angles. Before this, bikes have always been a compromise. My T130 involved sizing up to a Large, but that was married to a seat tube, which was just that too long for getting the saddle properly out the way. I grew tired of banging my balls on the back of the saddle!

Well it happens when standing or sitting and only when suspension compresses. So it won’t be the reverb or seat collar.

Possibly frame bearings but will take shock off tonight to try and diagnose it further.

Sorry to throw a spanner in the works, but I am surprised you are going for a small Race at 5’9”, although I understand your comments regarding coming from a small Nukeproof. But the Canyon Race is precisely intended to be a longer bike. If anything, you appear to be sizing down to make it feel like a more traditional bike, not sizing up.

The Strive Race Medium is all but identical to the Bird Aeris in Medium, in terms of both reach and wheelbase. For some reason, top tube is different, but it may well be an error, as above. I’d maintain that reach and wheelbase are the important ones to look at though. I am 5’10”, so only a touch taller than you and I have a Medium Aeris), with a 40mm stem. I was even debating for a while whether to go for a Large! I certainly wouldn’t have gone for a Small. Medium with a 40mm stem is just right. I could have ridden a Large, but it would have been that much harder work to keep the front wheel weighted. But a Small with a 35mm-40mm stem would have just been cramped.

Upto you of course, but if I was in your shoes, I’d be looking at Medium…

I’d second the Aeris. All sizes have relatively long reach/top tube, but that is paired to a relatively short seat tube and low standover.

Thanks all, this is all really helpful.

Re: giving up. I wasn’t this anxious about riding before the crash, although always had a little bit of nervousness. But that is pretty natural (and healthy). I think it is mainly down to 1. Me leaving it maybe 6 weeks after the crash, before getting back on the bike. 2. When I did get back on it, my mates (who had been going all that time) were suddenly much faster, seemingly more confident than ever. 3. Me simply not putting the time in on the bike since – four sporadic rides in recent weeks has been all. And lastly, having to adjust to a completely new bike, with a different geometry and feel. Overall, it feels that there is enough good about the hobby, joy if you will, to make it worth persevering. There’s the exercise, exhilaration, escapism, time in nature, time away with mates, sense of wellbeing afterwards. I’m also pleased to report that on the fourth and last run down BPW, which included Vicious Valley into A470, I enjoyed it a fair bit more than the earlier runs, despite still being far slower than my mates, as crucially, I was more relaxed.

Re: cornering. I am already very conscious of good technique; leaning the bike not the body, outside pedal down, outside elbow up, looking through corner with head, low centre of gravity, inside knee pointing into turn.

I totally agree with the loosening up thing. When one is worried, they are going to be stiff, not thinking about technique enough and therefore ride far worse. It’s silly, as I will happily hoon it around on my commuting bike in traffic, at greater speeds, with (generally) far harsher consequences. It barely crosses my mind though.

Definitely reckon a skills course is worth it though. Only thing though…is it really that beneficial over say studying technique videos on the internet (which I have already done to some extent)?

Thanks guys that’s really helpful.

I’m based in Bristol. I know there’s that skills course at Ashton Court but can imagine it’s a bit tame. Is it worth going further afield?

Yes, if I was 5’11+ like you, I’d have gone large too. And you’ll be able to run a 35mm stem nicely. At 5’10” I was even more in between sizes, which is a bit frustrating, but at the end of the day, either size would work well just in slightly different ways.

I had similar thoughts recently regarding Aeris sizing, and ummed and ahhed a lot!

I am 178cm (5’10”), with an inside leg of 32”, and arms perhaps slightly longer than average for my height. For my old bike, a Whyte T130, which had a 609mm top tube (no idea on reach sorry) and 55mm stem, that was about right. Medium with its 594mm toptube and 1132 wheelbase was too small. For most ‘’traditional’’ geo bikes, at 5’10” – 5’11” you are generally probably better off on a Large. This is particularly the case for the ‘’smaller’’ brands such as Santa Cruz.

On the Aeris, I went in with the same sort of attitude. I test rode both the medium and the large, both with a 35mm stem. On first test ride (while both felt great) I felt that the Large was perhaps a better fit, as it was that bit more roomy and stable, especially when riding around the car park. However, I certainly wouldn’t want to be any more stretched. i.e. I was at the limit, even with the 35mm stem, and I wouldn’t want to run a shorter stem like that for general trail riding.

Still undecided, I had another test ride, and after this further time on the bikes, I actually decided that Medium was better. It was still stable and roomy (thanks to its 1187mm wheelbase and 448 reach) but was just that bit more nimble and playful through twisty sections, whereas on the large I tended to run wide a bit more on corners. In addition, while I could just about run a 150mm dropper post on the large, it would be at the limit really, so the medium gives the opportunity to really slam the saddle if and when required! Likewise, the standover on the medium is that bit better too.

Ultimately, I could ride either size (and there really isn’t much in it to be honest). If I was only riding flat out, open tracks at v high speeds, trying to get air at every opportunity, the Large would probably be better. For more twisty trails, the medium would be better. For general, all round trail centres, bike park Wales and everything in between, the medium seemed to be the better overall fit. I therefore went for a medium, albeit with a 40mm stem (but could have run a 35mm stem). And as above, it is still long for a medium!

Other things of note – Olly Forster of Bikeradar rides a medium Giant Reign and believes it is a good fit. It’s pretty identical in terms of top tube, reach and wheelbase to the aeris, and he rode a large Kona Process previously. Likewise, Tomas Kuptys, a Bird rider, rides a Large aeris, but he (appears) to be around 6’3”.

When I spoke to Bird in more detail about this, they said that generally people around 5’10” go for a medium.

I may have confused you further, but hope it helps!

I’d second a bird aeris. Got DTEX501 wheels, pike rct3, monarch debonair, turbine cranks, XT11 drive train and brakes, carbon bars, reverb etc, for £2700.

Yes, that is a key concern actually; keeping enough weight on the front tyre. I did notice actually on the relatively brief demo of both sizes, that with the Large, I was very conscious of getting my weight forward, in an aggressive stance, when carving corners on the Verderers trail final descent. It was an instinctive thing, to offset the chance of the front washing out. Because I’d be right at the bottom of a Large in terms of sizing/fit, with the shortest possible stem (35mm), that behaviour would be at its most exaggerated (relatively speaking).

Ultimately, I think I could probably go with either size. Large would be a bit more stable, bit more roomy, and faster in a bomber-straight line kind of way. Whereas the medium would be slightly more agile in the twisty stuff, with more standover and the potential to really slam the saddle right down if/when required.

Had a good chat with Ben at Bird about it yesterday, and on balance, I think Medium with a 40mm or longer stem is going to be the best option. My riding is generally limited to trail centres and BPW, rather than big, wide open tracks taken at top speed. So a bit more manoeuvrability will be welcome. I was definitely surprised how small the bike looked in the flesh though! I guess it’s from coming from a Large Whyte T130, which although shorter and steeper than a medium Aeris, had a ‘bigger frame’ due to the higher standover and taller seat tube.

My issues with the Whyte T130 in large were: 1. The seat tube was 19”, so even with the saddle completely dropped, it still felt a little bit in the way on the steeps. 2. I craved a bit more slackness. 3. While it was wonderfully playful, it definitely lacked for/aft stability, especially in the air. The Aeris on the other hand, even in a medium, is 11mm longer in the toptube, 40mm longer in the wheelbase, 1.5 degrees slacker, and with acres of standover. While still being quite playful, due to the poppy suspension.

Hopefully it’ll be the right choice. :\

Thanks for the useful input. As the reach is fairly long in each respective size, perhaps a medium with a 40mm stem will be the “right” size. Maybe car park tests can be deceptive. On the actual trail, it felt like either bike could fit and do the job well. I guess the advantage of the medium is more agility in corners and definitely being able to run a 150mm dropper. it’ll still have a relatively long wheelbase and slack head angle.

Interestingly though, have you seen the new Whyte geometry? On a medium 901 hardtail it’s 637mm top tube and 40mm stem. Pretty much an Aeris in large! And that’s recommended for heights 5’6″-5’10”. Similar with the G160.

Likewise, you get Danny Milner of MBR riding a Large Reign and Strive in the reviews, yet he’s 5’9-5’10”.

Did any of you 5’10” folk try a large Aeris? Did it feel definitely too big?

Large is an 18.5″ seat tube, so could probably run 150mm dropper (the demo bike had a 100mm dropper and I had it about 5cm out of the collar).

I’m torn. All I know is that with the 35mm stem, the Large felt more roomy and right when pedalling. The staff also said large looked like a better fit from the car park test.

Don’t get me wrong, medium felt good on the trail too. Ergh, don’t know what to do now.

By chance, I ended up hiring an Aeris at FOD today. Had no idea they’d be in the hire fleet.

Fully expected medium to be right size, but actually, with the 35mm stem, the Large was a better fit. On the medium I just felt a bit “over the front”. Hire staff said the same. 5’10” but with long arms. I’d definitely have to run a 45-50mm stem. And given that the bike is designed around a 35mm stem, I think I’m going to change order to a large.

Medium was a bit more agile through turns, but large felt better overall. Oh and its sooo stable off drops and jumps- felt incredible in the air.

I can’t find the reach measurement for the t130 (only the aeris), so it’s difficult to compare.

Bird recommended a medium for my 5’10” height, unless I wanted a “really big” bike. They also advised two staff at 5’10” rode the medium and felt it well suited.

As I didn’t want a barge, and wanted to run a 150mm reverb, with loads of stand over, medium seemed the right one for the job. It’s still longer (4cm in wheelbase), slacker and lower than my old t130 in large. So I’m hoping I made the right choice :/

I was on the brink of ordering an Aeris. Does this mean a new, updated one is out soon?!

I think the RS is slightly cheaper than the 2015 Works, because of the wheelset primarily (Roam 30, rather than Roam 40), along with the drive train (raceface as opposed to Sram X1). I could be wrong though.

They look slightly different in terms of geometry, but I’m not sure the angles have actually been released have they?

The G150 (G160) and 900 hardtails are around 20-25mm longer in the toptube to their respective 2015 models, so a fair jump. Whether that translates to the T130 is unknown and whether the head angles have changed on the T130 and G160 I am not sure.

That pictured orange T130 with the Fox forks is the Carbon version I think, due out in January 2016. Dread to think how much that will set you back! £4500 at least I’d have thought.

Just sold my T130 works 2015 on ebay – I am really going to miss it!

Selling my T130 Works SCR in large, in case you’re interested.

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/whyte-t130-works-scr-large-with-upgrades

I’d agree with the sentiments in this post- go for a moderately slack, short-mid travel trail bike. It’ll be more playful, spritely and engaging in most situations while still handling reds at BPW no problem at all.

Think Cube Stereo 140, Santa Cruz 5010, whyte t130, transition scout.

It’s nice to see Pinkbike’s review of the Cube Stereo 140. Bikeradar seem so focused on criticising any trail bike that isn’t super slack and long. They now routinely slate bikes like the Cube Stereo 140 or T130 in this department. You always get the feeling that if they were a degree slacker and an inch longer, they’d judge that as a purely positive thing, with no negative side effects. But for 80% of most people’s riding, on the majority of trails they ride, the nimbleness and responsiveness of a moderately slack, moderately long bike makes a lot of sense! From Pinkbike: –

”Cube’s Stereo 140 HPA Pro addresses the need for a more capable trailbike – one that can be trusted to get a rider with good skills down truly technical trails, without sacrificing the brighter handling and pedaling aspects of the genre that are best suited for the type of trails that we spend the most time upon. Riding the more nimble Cube around Sedona made the prospect of hauling our butts around the mountain on long-travel, super-slack enduro racing bikes just to get the maximum enjoyment from the 120 seconds we spent dropping down super-techy sections seem comical. The Stereo 140 Pro is a bike that makes almost every twist and turn of the trail a joyful challenge. The Stereo 140 proved to be an enjoyable and capable AM/trailbike – one that offers both the performance and the price tag that will make a lot of riders happy. – RC”

I don’t notice any difference in damping either. But I love my Thomson carbon 750mm bars. They look gorgeous, they’re light and beautifully subtle in sweep.

The 2r is a great helmet. I used it on the first proper ride at Cymcarn last Monday (hottest day of the year so far). Took the chin guard off for initial climb but kept chin guard on for all the rest of it and it was great. Not too hot at all, comfortable and gave some peice of mind descending. After a low speed crash onto my face previously, I’ll be using it from rolling singletrack to descending to uplift days at bike park Wales.

Only snag is sizing. I have a 61cm head and the large only just fits ok. I need the dial tightened all the way, or it’s simply too loose. But medium is too small, tight on temples and a gentle of chinguard makes it contact with my chin. So definitely try before you buy.

if I didn’t have my Whyte T130, the transition scout is what I’d buy. Short (ish) travel with semi gnar, but playful angles and like the scout and t130 are so much fun.

The Bikeradar review of both the Santa Cruz 5010 and the Cube Stereo 140 further call into question the worth of the T130 Works review.

Both the SC and the Cube get rave reviews…yet the angles are almost identical to the T130 Works (the Santa Cruz is actually steeper in the head angle and the size Medium is shorter in the top tube). And the kit on the T130 is considerably better value!! Makes no sense.

Andy, what don’t you like about it? What are you looking for in abike exactly?

That’s pretty extreme! Bikes get dinged and chipped, just the way it is. I like a few battle scars on my bikes!

How do you find the mere 6° of backsweep? Does it feel a bit weird and unnatural at first?

Sweet. Looks much better in black than the previous gold I think.

Recently installed an Easton Haven 55mm stem. Only taken it on one ride so far but definitely an Improvement from stock 70mm. More responsive and slightly more planted on descents. Reach absolutely fine when climbing (with seat up) too.

Also ordered a Thomson 750mm carbon bar, but it’s arrived and has a mere 6° backsweep. holding it next to whyte bars shows the bar ends 2cm further forward! I’d ordered it as feared 55mm stem may reduce reach too much (it doesn’t) so probably going to return it for a more comfortable shape.

Mjsmke- I too was thinking about removing the bash guard. Weird it’s on the t130 but not the g150! does it serve any purpose (like keeping the chain secure) other than protection against stray rocks?

Decided that 50mm stem is gonna be just a touch short. Had considered a 60mm apex stem, but have compromised and ordered an Easton Haven 55mm.

Bars will be ordered soon, either renthal 740/780 or Thomson 750.

Anyone going for properly wide at 780?

Got 130mm Pikes on my Whyte T130. Love them. Stiff, plush, supportive, while being a bit more responsive and snappy compared to the longer travel versions.

I love my Endura MT500 knee pads. Comfortable, durable and decent protection. Never had an issue with comfort.